Inquiry-based field trip to a botanical gardenInquiry-based field trip to a botanical garden 1 Gonçalo Nuno Carreira Pereira Escola Profissional de Ciências Geográficas, Lisboa

Inquiry-based field trip to a botanical garden

1

Gonçalo Nuno Carreira Pereira

Escola Profissional de Ciências Geográficas, Lisboa

Helena Moita de Deus

Agrupamento de Escolas Amadora Oeste, Amadora

Helsinki, Finland, May 22nd, 2017

LUMAT 2017International LUMAT Symposium: Research and Practice in

Math, Science and Technology Education

Theoretical Background

Out-of-school learning experiences involve manycharacteristics of formal learning, complementing itby allowing the construction of knowledge withpersonal meaning, the realization of genuine choicesand challenging tasks, taking control over the processof learning and collaboration with others. (Tal, 2013)

Visits to locations beyond the classroom offerstudents opportunities to develop new skills, observeactual specimens rather than models or photographs,and stretch their senses. (Dillon, 2013)

2


“Botanical Gardens offer learning opportunities forpractical and multi-sensory activities with plants.”(Martins-Loução & Gaio-Oliveira, 2017, p. 10)

Educational activities in the Botanical Garden areinevitably dynamic and very enriching, offering animmense availability of educational resources anddirect contact with real models and authenticexamples of natural phenomena. (Tavares, Silva &Bettencourt, 2015a)

3

Theoretical BackgroundIn this context, inquiry-based science education providesstudents with an inspiring environment with the needed toolsand opportunities to discover and use them on their own.(Tavares, Silva & Bettencourt, 2015a)

The essential features of inquiry are:

• learner is engaged in a scientifically oriented question,

• learner gives priority to evidence in responding to the question,

• learner uses evidence to develop an explanation,

• learning connects the explanation to scientific knowledge,

• learner communicates and justifies the explanation. (Bybee, 2006)

4


When developing an inquiry-based science education activity,the teacher does not explain everything but is a facilitator whosupports the students in finding their own solutions andprovides help only when needed or required. The teacher oreducator plays a key role as organizer and promoter of aworking environment conductive to knowledge buildingprocesses and helping critical thinking and reflection ofstudents. (Tavares, Silva & Bettencourt, 2015b)

To take full advantage of an inquiry-based field trip to abotanical garden, a good preparation is needed. The teachershould make an exploratory visit to develop learning situationsthat explore the new context in order to promote a moremeaningful learning (Galvão et al. 2006).

5

Theoretical BackgroundField trips are an extension of the formal science classes,functioning as an integrating element of contents andlearning. In some cases, they are a motivational element tolater allow the consolidation of learning in the classroom. Inother cases, they constitute a form of consolidation ofprevious learning.

For the experiences to be effective they must be planned,carefully implemented and should continue to be worked onwhen back into the classroom (Dillon et al., 2006). Therefore,field trips should always be structured around pre-visitorientation lessons and follow-up lessons (Orion, 2001).

6


It is also important to emphasize that the most effectiveway to teach students about the Nature of Science andabout Scientific Inquiry is through an explicit andreflective teaching approach (Lederman e Lederman,2013).

The formative assessment can help teachers and pupilsto feel more confident in the steps of inquiry-basedscience education and improve their achievements.Therefore, formative assessment is an ideal assessingapproach. (Rokos, Zavodska, Petr & Papacek, 2016)

7

Lisbon BotanicalGarden

Lisbon Botanical Garden belongs to the National Museum ofNatural History and Science of Lisbon University. It is ascientific garden that was classified as a national heritagemonument in 2010.

It was designed in the 19th century and began to be plantedin 1873, thanks to the dedication of teachers Andrade Corvoand Count of Ficalho, and was open to the public in 1878.

With an area of 4 hectares of garden, it is possible to travelthe world in space and time: to know a huge diversity ofexotic plants and other plants that dominated thelandscapes in the past.

8

Goals

- To develop a didactic strategy through inquiry in a sciencemuseum.

- To assess formatively the impact of the strategy on studentlearning.

- To reflect on the implementation of inquiry activities in school.

Purpose

To develop an activity, according to the Inquiry-Based ScienceEducation (IBSE) methodology, focused on a field trip to the LisbonBotanical Garden (LBG), that promotes the learning of NaturalSciences.

Learning Strategy

9

Participants

29 students from an 8th grade class at a school in the region of Lisbon

Curricular Framework

Subject:Natural Sciences

Curricular contents:Earth's sustainability

Ecosystems and Sustainable Resource Management

Investigative Skills

Identify problemsPlan investigations

Analyze and interpret data

10

Learning Strategy

11

LearningStrategy

The activity wasplanned based on thetheoretical model ofthe 5 E's of Bybee(2006).

EVALUATION

ENGAGEMENT

EXPLORATION

EXPLANATION

ELABORATION

Learning Strategy

12

The pre-visit orientation classes included two phases ofengagement.

The first phase of engagement for the class targeted theagglutinating theme of the activity: "The Botanical Garden as aprivileged space for learning outside the classroom".

At this stage, the class constructed a concept map based on thequestions: "What is a Botanical Garden?" And "What is the use of aBotanical Garden?" (ENGAGEMENT).

This class was also used to introduce the use of the IHMC CmapToolsprogram to build concept maps, in articulation with ICT subject.

The construction of this conceptual map permitted the identificationof the initial ideas of the class (EVALUATION), and recognition ofsome alternative conceptions.

13

Learning Strategy

Learning Strategy

The second phase of engagement included theintroduction of a theme for each group through ConceptCartoons (CC) (Naylor and Keogh, 2000), which allowedthem to focus on the theme and to initiate the discussion(ENGAGEMENT).

To each of the six groups of students were drawn thefollowing topics: biotic relations; adaptations to differenthumidity conditions; adaptations of carnivorous plants;plants as natural resources; conservation of plantbiodiversity and the life cycle of butterflies.

14

15

Learning Strategy

Concept Cartoon for the group that studied the adaptations to different humidity conditions

Plants of very humid ecosystems can live in

very dry environments!

The plants of dry environments have adaptations to lose

little water!

Plants of aquatic ecosystems need to be able to search for

air!

The plants of environments with different moisture content are very

different!

Learning Strategy

From the analysis of the CC each group identified theirproblem and started the development of the first versionof the conceptual map (EXPLORATION).

The pre-conceptual maps permitted the identification ofstudents' knowledge about the subject.

Through a checklist, the definition of the research problemto be investigated in the field trip to the Botanical Gardenwas assessed (EVALUATION) .

16

Learning Strategy

17

Learning Strategy

In the next class the students finished the tasks and startedplanning the data collection (EXPLORATION). The students weregiven lists of species of living beings to study and the map of theBotanical Garden with the location of their species. Researchplanning was assessed through a rubric (EVALUATION).

During the fieldtrip to the Botanical Garden, data collection wascarried out according to the planning. Students made records ofthe observations (EXPLORATION). The observations of the workdeveloped in the Botanical Garden was recorded in field notes(EVALUATION).

18

Learning Strategy

19

Learning Strategy

In the follow-up lessons, students did the analysis and discussion ofthe results (EXPLORATION), autonomously, then communicating theirconclusions properly substantiated (EXPLANATION).

The questions unanswered with the data collection were solved withbibliographical research (ELABORATION).

At this stage students were supported through the Moodle platformand via e-mail. In this way, feedback was provided about thepresentation in order to be able to improve it - formative evaluation(EVALUATION).

In a classroom lesson, the students communicated the investigativework developed to the class (EXPLANATION).

The analysis and treatment of the data exposed in the PowerPointpresentation was done through a rubric (EVALUATION).

20

Learning Strategy

Learning Strategy

In the guidelines for the development of thePowerPoint presentation, students were asked tosummarize all the phases of the research workdeveloped to stimulate reflection. The evaluationinstruments were reapplied to verify if there was aevolution throughout the investigative process(EVALUATION).

22

Learning StrategyIntegration with other investigative activities

Investigative Activity

"The sea level is rising!"

23

ELABORATION

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIeTg9GfFIwInternational Teachers’ Climate Change Forum

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIeTg9GfFIw

Investigative Activity “Is the Earth a greenhouse?”

24


ELABORATION

25


IPCC Report 2007ELABORATION

Learning Strategy

In another follow-up lesson, the groupcompleted the conceptual map about theBotanical Garden integrating the differentcontributions of the work developed by thegroups (EVALUATION).

Finally, the students performed a reflectionabout the set of activities which was subjectedto a content analysis (EVALUATION).

26

Evaluation of the Inquiry-based Fieldtrip

In the engagement phase, the students showed greatinterest in the use of CC as triggers for the formulationof open and resolvable problems in the existingconditions. In this capacity, only one group posed aless comprehensive problem.

The construction of the initial conceptual map allowedthe understand of students' previous ideas, and thefinal one functioned as a structuring, integrating andsynthesis element of data and their analysis.

27


28

Results of the application of the checklist to assess the definition of the research problem


Initial conceptual map of group 4 that studied the adaptations to different humidity conditions

29


Final conceptual map of group 4 that studied the adaptations to different humidity conditions 30


The groups that presented the most complex finalconceptual map were those who did a more detailed andstructured analysis and discussion of the results.

The evaluation of the pre and post-visit conceptual mapsof each group was carried out based on a quantitativeanalysis, with an increase in concept numbers, correctlinks, cross-links, correct prepositions and hierarchicallevels.

It was also verified that the number of cross-linkspresented was reduced and that group 1 presented thepost conceptual map equal to the pre, even after receivingthe formative feedback.

31


Results of the application of the quantitative analysis grid of conceptual maps

32


The planning phase allowed students to reflect on theinvestigation they would carry out, allowing greaterautonomy in the LBG.

The groups identified the materials needed for datacollection, including writing materials and cameras.

Regarding the methods of data recording, four groups didnot explain them in the initial planning, and explainedthem in the communication of their research.

With regard to the selection of data to be collected inorder to respond to the problem, several groups did notmake it explicit either initially or in the final presentation.

33


34

Results of the application of the rubric to assess the planning of the research

1Emerging

2Developing

3Consolidating

4Extending


During the visit, the students took notes and photographsof the plants and the information boards.

Some groups did not select the information according tothe defined problem.

The students were very committed and motivated in theaccomplishment of this work.

35


The organization, treatment and descriptive analysis of the datawere carried out adequately by all groups.

The presentation of the research was prepared by students outsidethe classroom and the groups delivered the first versions of thePowerPoint presentations via electronic mail.

Several aspects that needed to be improved were found, inparticular the failure to comply with the instructions previouslyprovided.

One group presented the results without selecting the datacollected according to the problem.

In this feedback suggestions were provided and students improvedvarious aspects of the PowerPoint presentation of theirinvestigations.

36


37

1Emerging

2Developing

3Consolidating

4Extending

Results of the application of the rubric to assess the analysis and treatment of research data


Although the works presented were very rich, the discussion of theresults was limited in some aspects.

For this may have contributed the lack of argumentative skills ofsome students in the class, already detected in the application ofother inquiry-based activities.

In another follow-up lesson, the class as a whole completed the finalconceptual map about the Botanical Garden which allowed theintegration of the groups investigations’ carried out throughout theactivity.

In this conceptual map, the main phases of the research were againfocused and other functions of a botanical garden were introducedthat the students did not have access to during the visit, such as theherbarium and the seed bank.

38


39

Final conceptual map in IHMC CmapTools developed in the ICT class based on the following questions:• What is a Botanical Garden?• What is the use of a Botanical Garden?


To conclude the application of this activity students wereasked to carry out an individual reflection based on thefollowing questions:

•"What is a Botanical Garden and what is it for?";

•"What did you learn about the issue you investigated?";

• "Identify the phases of your investigative work.";

•"What did you like most / least about the activity?".

The reflections of the students were subjected to a contentanalysis.

40


Concerning the question, "What is a Botanical Garden and whatis it for?", 21 students identified the botanical garden as a spacewith plants, but some students also talked about animalsincluding butterflies.

The students also identified the spaces in the botanical garden. 5students referred to the greenhouse, 4 the butterfly house and 3the laboratory.

19 students identified the botanical garden as a space tolearn/study and 18 as a place to promote the conservation ofspecies.

Some students also mentioned other activities that can be donein the botanical garden, for example: investigate; observe; visit;planting plants; space of leisure and space of culture.

41


Concerning the question, "What did you learn

about the issue you investigated?":

•20 students identified the work theme;

•17 students listed what they learned;

•15 students made a generalization of the learning

about the theme;

•5 students presented examples about the species

they investigated.

42


With regard to the question, "Identify the phases of yourinvestigative work.", the phases identified by the studentswere:

•identification of the problem by 16 students;

•planning of data collection by 12 students;

•data collection by 28 students;

•organization and processing of data by 13 students;

•analysis and discussion of the results by 14 students;

•solve the problem by 15 students;

•communication by 8 students.

43


It is also worth noting that although the students havereflected several times about the phases of theirinvestigative work, only 10 students have been able to do adetailed description of these phases, 11 students describethem partially and 7 students describe less than threephases of the investigative work.

This was a difficulty identified earlier. Students find difficultto understand questions of the nature of science andundervalue epistemological scientific knowledge whencompared to declarative and procedural scientificknowledge, despite continuous valuation throughout theacademic year, whether in learning activities or inevaluation tests.

44


In the question, "What did you like the most about theactivity?", there was a great dispersion of responses.

From the students' answers, the new learning aboutthe plants, was referred by 7 students and to searchplants in the LBG with a map, was mentioned by 4students.

The students enjoyed doing the investigation in thebotanical garden autonomously. Two students referredthat they felt the experience as a kind of adventure.

One student made reference to the similarity of thework developed with the one of the scientists.

45


The response of two students is given below as example.

"What I liked most was to find the plants with the mapalone with my colleagues and take pictures of the plants.“

Student 2

"What I liked most was when we went to the garden andsearch the plants, because we looked like real scientists,especially in the rain.“

Student 15

46


On the question “What did you like least in theactivity?”,

•8 students reported the fact that was raining;

•6 students mentioned having nothing to pointout;

•4 students identified the realization of theconceptual map;

•4 students indicated the processing/organizationof data.

47

Conclusion

In conclusion, the development of activities that promote

active learning allow the development of a broader range of

investigative skills, such as:

•Diagnose problems;

•Planning and carrying out investigations;

•Analyse data;

•Search for information;

•Communicate;

•Work in group.

48

Conclusion

Taking into consideration the acquired experiencewith the implementation of this inquiry-based activity,it is recommended that students develop investigativeskills in other contexts (experimental, socioscientificissues, decision-making activities, etc.).

In particular, the quality of planning the investigationin the LBG is crucial, facilitating the autonomous workof students who, because of the size of the garden,have limited access to teacher guidance.

49

Conclusion

A careful pre-visit preparation by the teacher and aconstant feedback during the implementation ofactivities are considered fundamental, taking on atutorial role, monitoring and questioning thestudents during their inquiry-based work.

The feedback provided promotes the improvementand evolution of learning, encouraging theengagement, autonomy and creativity of student inthe learning process (Harlen, 2007).

50

References

Bybee, R. (2006). Scientific inquiry and science teaching. In L. Flick and N. Lederman (Ed.) ScientificInquiry and Nature of Science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education (1-14).Dordrecht: Springer.

Dillon, J.; Rickinson, M.; Teamey, K.; Morris, M.; Choi, M. Y; Sanders, D. & Benefield, P. (2006). Thevalue of outdoor learning: evidence from research in the UK and elsewhere. School Science Review,87(320), 107-111.

Dillon, J. (2013). Science, the Environment and Education Beyond the Classroom. In B. Fraser; K. Tobin& C. McRobbie (Ed.). Second international handbook of science education (1081-1095). Dordrecht:Springer.

Galvão, C.; Reis, P.; Freire, A. & Oliveira, T. (2006). Avaliação de competências em ciências: Sugestõespara professores dos ensinos Básicos e Secundário. Porto: Asa.

Harlen, W. (2007). Assessment of learning. London: Sage.

Lederman, N. & Lederman, J. (2013). Nature of scientific knowledge and scientific inquiry: Buildinginstructional capacity through professional development. In B. Fraser; K. Tobin & C. McRobbie (Ed.).Second international handbook of science education. Dordrecht: Springer, 335-359.

51

52

ReferencesMartins-Loução, M.; Gaio-Oliveira, G. (2017). New Challenges to Promote Botany’s Practice UsingBotanic Gardens: The Case Study of the Lisbon Botanic Garden. In A. Ansari; S. Gill; Z. Abbas & M.Naeem (Ed.) Plant Biodiversity: Monitoring, Assessment and Conservation (1-17). Boston: CABIInternational.

Naylor, S. & Keogh, B. (2000). Concept cartoons in science education. Cheschire: Millgate House.

Orion, N. (2001). A educação em ciências da terra. Da teoria à prática – implementação de novasestratégias de ensino em diferentes ambientes de aprendizagem. In Marques, L. & Praia, J. (Coord.)Geociências nos currículos dos ensinos básico e secundário. Aveiro: Universidade de Aveiro.

Rokos, L.; Zavodska, R.; Petr, J.; & Papacek, M. (2016). Formative Assessment Methods in BiologyEducation: Pedagogical Study at Primary School in the Czech Republic. Bulletin of the South Ural StateUniversity. Ser. Education. Educational Sciences, 8(4), 94–99.

Tal, T. (2013). Out-of-School: Learning Experiences, Teaching and Students’ Learning. In B. Fraser; K.Tobin & C. McRobbie (Ed.). Second international handbook of science education (1109-1122).Dordrecht: Springer.

Tavares, A.; Silva, S. & Bettencourt, T. (2015a). Advantages of Science Education Through IBSEMethodology. In P. Blessinger & J. Carfora. Inquiry-Based Learning for Science, Technology,Engineering, and Math (STEM) Programs: A Conceptual and Practical Resource for Educators.Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, Volume 4 (151-169). Bingley: Emerald GroupPublishing Limited.

Tavares, A.; Silva, S & Bettencourt, T. (2015b). Advantages Of Applying IBSE Method: The CoimbraInquire Course Case-Study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 174 – 178.

Inquiry-based field trip to a botanical garden

53

Helena Moita de Deus

Agrupamento de Escolas Amadora Oeste, Amadora

[email protected]

LUMAT 2017International LUMAT Symposium: Research and Practice in

Math, Science and Technology Education

Gonçalo Nuno Carreira Pereira

Escola Profissional de Ciências Geográficas, Lisboa

[email protected]

Helsinki, Finland, May 22nd, 2017

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

Inquiry-based field trip to a botanical gardenInquiry-based field trip to a botanical garden 1 Gonçalo Nuno Carreira Pereira Escola Profissional de Ciências Geográficas, Lisboa